A History of Sanskrit Literature c21.s6.1

c21.s6.1

Bāṇa has most fortunately preserved for us some account of his fame by giving up the first two and a half chapters of his *Harṣacarita* to an account of himself and his family. He was a Brahmin of the Vātsyāyanas, whose mythical origin he depicts in detail; his great-grandfather Pāçupata had a son Arthapati who had eleven sons, of whom Citrabhānu married the Brahmin lady Rājyadēvī and had as son Bāṇa. His mother died young, and his father brought him up with tender care until, after his initiation at the age of fourteen, he died untimely; the history of this part of his life is hinted at in the touching picture at the beginning of the *Kādambarī* of the fate of the young parrot. After his father's death Bāṇa mixed, it is clear, in dubious company, though in part it was literary, including a poet in the vernacular (*bhāṣākavi*), Īçāna, the Prākrit poet Vāyuvikāra, two panegyrists, a painter, two singers, a music teacher, an actor, a Çaiwa devotee, a Jain monk, a Brahmin mendicant, and many others. A fit of wandering seized him and he went far, acquiring evil repute in abundance. But by consorting with the wise and the good he claims to have redeemed a misspent youth, and finally returned to his home at Prītikūṭa. When there he received a royal summons through Kṛṣṇa, brother of Harṣavardhana, who as a friend warned him to make his peace with the king—which suggests that Bāṇa had been engaged in something worse than sowing wild oats. At any rate he went to the royal camp, and was received with marked coldness even according to his own account by the king, but shortly afterwards received the royal favour. That is all we know definitely of his fate in life. He proceeds to tell us that he recited the *Harṣacarita* because on a visit home he was asked to speak of the great king, but the story is unfinished, and what is more striking, the *Kādambarī* also is incomplete, though an end was made for it by his son Bhūṣaṇa Bhaṭṭa or Bhaṭṭa Pulina, who states that he did so because regret was felt at the incomplete condition of the work. It is by no means clear which of the two works really was written first, though there is a good deal to be said for the priority of the *Harṣacarita*. We may, however, believe that there was much touching-up of either tale during Bāṇa's lifetime.